House Intelligence Committee Threatens Rep. Grayson For Informing Other Reps About Leaked NSA Docs From The Guardian
from the congressional-failures dept
We already wrote about Glenn Greenwald's piece from this weekend concerning Rep. Mike Rogers and the House Intelligence Committee actively blocking access to information, documents and briefings for other members of Congress who have expressed interest in the details of the NSA surveillance program, but I wanted to focus in on a separate issue in that same article. In the original post, we noted how Rep. Alan Grayson was told directly by Rogers that the Intelligence Committee had taken a "voice vote" and decided to deny his request for some information (and when he asked for more details, he was told that it was "classified").Grayson, of course, was one of the first members of Congress to speak out forcefully about the NSA surveillance program and why he found it to be unconstitutional. As we showed at the time, Grayson's speech, included a posterboard of some of the slides that were published in the Guardian from Snowden's leak. In fact, we pointed out that it seemed especially ridiculous for the government to block access to the Guardian or other websites that had published the same documents, in part because Grayson had shown those same documents on the House floor. To pretend that they were still classified is just the ultimate in sticking your head in the sand.
But, it gets worse. At the end of the Greenwald piece, we find out that the House Intelligence Committee threatened Grayson with sanctions for sharing the same slides that were published by the Guardian with fellow members of Congress:
In early July, Grayson had staffers distribute to House members several slides published by the Guardian about NSA programs as part of Grayson's efforts to trigger debate in Congress. But, according to one staff member, Grayson's office was quickly told by the House Intelligence Committee that those slides were still classified, despite having been published and discussed in the media, and directed Grayson to cease distribution or discussion of those materials in the House, warning that he could face sanctions if he continued.Think about that for a second. Here were documents that were published in major newspapers, discussing issues of key importance for Congress -- and a member of Congress is actually being threatened with sanctions for daring to send this front page news around to other colleagues in order to have a discussion about the NSA's actions. At this point, it would appear that the House Intelligence Committee isn't just failing at its job of handling oversight for the intelligence agencies, but it's now actively obstructing the rest of Congress from living up to their oath as Congressional Representatives to protect the Constitution.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: alan grayson, classified info, house intelligence committee, mike rogers, nsa, nsa surveillance, sanctions
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Easy fix:
If nothing else it would make for some entertaining threats, as (what is increasingly looking like) the NSA's lapdogs start sending out threats telling congresscritters to stop reading the newspaper.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
In other headlines...
Follow up:
House Intelligence Committee denies having any intelligence on recently reported stories about the recent lack of oversight on Intelligence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Light of Day...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Even if the National Security power agrees to tear down "this" set of programs, modern communications infrastructure is simply too tempting a target and they'll just set up new programs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
/sarc (maybe).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
i wonder how much further the USA will sink before somebody actually grabs it by the scruff of the neck, gives it a damn good shaking and bring it back to reality? if it doesn't happen soon, it will be too late for anything other than this 'Facist lookalike' to be removed! so sad that a country that was formed because of the way it was being treated by the 'Holier than thou' attitude of the British and started as a country where all were equal, has come to this!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: In other headlines...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: In other headlines...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: In other headlines...
House Intelligence Committee denies having any intelligence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Need more Sand .... NEED MORE SAND
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Legally speaking...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If Congress was, for example, a contract manufacturer, and gave you "product" with this level of "quality," would you accept it or get another manufacturer?
This Congress has totally redefined the term "sucks" to the point where now they're just acting totally retarded.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Supreme Court Ruling Backs Grayson
Senator Gravel entered classified Vietnam War documents into the Congressional Record from a subcommittee position that had nothing to do with Intelligence. From the entry in Wikipedia on "The Pentagon Papers:"
To ensure the possibility of public debate about the content of the papers, on June 29, US Senator Mike Gravel entered 4,100 pages of the Papers to the record of his Subcommittee on Public Buildings and Grounds. These portions of the Papers were subsequently published by Beacon Press, the publishing arm of the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations.[9]
Article I, Section 6 of the United States Constitution provides that "for any Speech or Debate in either House, [a Senator or Representative] shall not be questioned in any other Place", thus the Senator could not be prosecuted for anything said on the Senate floor, and, by extension, for anything entered to the Congressional Record, allowing the Papers to be publicly read without threat of a treason trial and conviction. This was confirmed by the Supreme Court in the decision Gravel v. United States.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Legally speaking...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The Light of Day...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This explains a lot
Get informed? Lose your access!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Might be a technicality, but even dumber than it seems
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
This isn't a problem - it's a simple common sense way to operate given limited resources and expertise.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Supreme Court Ruling Backs Grayson
But he can still be sanctioned *by Congress*. It only prohibits being questioned in any OTHER place; it allows that Congress itself can sanction him.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Supreme Court Ruling Backs Grayson
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: In other headlines...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Legally speaking...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Retaliatory Expulsion?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: In other headlines...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]